Putting natural persons back in charge of our government

thom hartmann...

With the end of corporate personhood, it will be possible for the humans of the United States and every nation in the world to define the terms of a new economy. With natural persons once again in charge of government, we can redefine the rules of business so that corporations are profitable when their actions lead to sustainability and a clean environment, respond to values defined by local communities, and promote and develop renewable forms of energy. We can strip out the strings and the harnesses put into regulatory law by corporate lobbyists so that the government agencies charged with protecting us from malefactors and criminals can once again work.

[...]

Once corporate personhood is eliminated and corporations are again seen as they really are—the fictitious legal creatures of the states that authorized and created them—all this can change. The rightful representatives of humans— our governments—can then pass laws like the ones that were once part of this nation and its states, forbidding corporations from attempting to influence the laws and the regulatory agencies that oversee their activities.

[...]

"Democracy alone can supply the vitalizing force to stir the peoples of the world into triumphant action," Truman said, "not only against their human oppressors, but also against their ancient enemies—hunger, misery, and despair."

The role of government is to protect, defend, and represent the interests of its own people, he said. "Democracy maintains that government is established for the benefit of the individual, and is charged with the responsibility of protecting the rights of the individual and his freedom in the exercise of his abilities." Citing Locke’s concept of natural rights, he added, "Democracy is based on the conviction that man has the moral and intellectual capacity, as well as the inalienable right, to govern himself with reason and justice."

"natural persons"... kind of has a nice ring to it, doesn't it...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 1 comments

The Occupy protesters are acting like citizens, believing they have the power to change things

thoughtful perspective from william greider writing in the nation...

In Occupy Wall Street, we are witnessing a rare event—the birth of a social movement. Ordinary people are engaging in sustained grassroots protest against the political order and against citizens’ exclusion from the decision-making that governs their lives. They seek to rearrange the distribution of power, and they are doing so by injecting a creative, often playful vitality that has been missing in our decayed democracy. The protesters have slipped around the soul-deadening, high-gloss marketing of mass-communication culture. Instead, they insist that politics starts with citizens talking to one another and listening—agreeing and disagreeing with mutual respect. The open-door, non hierarchical membership commits people to engage in what historian Lawrence Goodwyn calls “democratic conversation.”

The Occupy protesters are acting like citizens, believing they have the power to change things. Their ambition reflects a core mystery of American democracy—the fact that humble people can acquire power when they convince themselves they can. Warmhearted and broad-minded, these citizens audaciously claim to speak for the 99 percent—and despite initial ridicule and dismissal of them by much of the press, polls show they have strong public support. The Occupiers have even managed to make uptight reporters write about corporate greed.

[...]

But will it last? Skeptics are entitled to their doubts, but for important reasons I am confident this movement will endure. First, because it is very unlikely the establishment will respond substantively to OWS’s grievances—and that will only make the protesters more determined. OWS has brilliantly focused its many complaints on the very sector—the megabankers and financiers—on whom the politicians are dependent. In different ways, Republicans and Democrats are aligned with the greedheads and are thus unwilling to punish their crimes or cut them down to size.

[...]

In any case, this movement is not about electoral politics—not yet, anyway. It is about saving the country, an objective bigger than politics and politicians. Its vision is nothing less than halting the degradation and fostering the rebirth of the nation’s original democratic promise. It is the nature of authentic movements to seek large and majestic goals that seem impossible to pedestrian politicians—and, at first, to most citizens. Standing up requires both uncommon courage and severe provocation.

[...]

[R]adical reform will originate only from ordinary citizens—not policy experts and their Wall Street supporters, who led the nation into ruin. The movement can inspire the people to become creative citizens again. Are we up to it? Let us find out. Let the democratic conversations begin.

i'm more than happy to bask in greider's optimism... i sincerely hope it's justified...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The state would like us to be violent

rebecca solnit posting at common dreams...

The state would like us to be violent. Violence as cooptation tries to make us more like them, and if we’re like them they win twice—once because being unlike them is our goal and again because then we’re then easier to imprison, brutalize, marginalize, etc. We have another kind of power, though the term nonviolence only defines what it is not; some call our power people power. It works. It’s powerful. It’s changed and it’s changing the world.

[...]

The powers that be are already scared of the Occupy movement and not because of tiny acts of violence. They are scared because right now we speak pretty well for the 99%. And because we set out to change the world and it’s working. The president of Russia warmed at the G20 Summit a week or so ago, "The reward system of shareholders and managers of financial institution should be changed step by step. Otherwise the 'Occupy Wall street' slogan will become fashionable in all developed countries." That’s fear.

[...]

This movement is winning. It’s winning by being broad and inclusive, by emphasizing what we have in common and bridging differences between the homeless, the poor, those in freefall, the fiscally thriving but outraged, between generations, races and nationalities and between longtime activists and never-demonstrated-before newcomers. It’s winning by keeping its eyes on the prize, which is economic justice and direct democracy, and by living out that direct democracy through assemblies and other means right now.

i truly wish that this movement was indeed "winning"... unfortunately, i think it's got a very long way to go... it's most distressing seeing the occupy folks kicked out of oakland and portland and other cities... it's also distressing when i attend gatherings at occupy reno and see people floundering... it's been a very encouraging start, perhaps the most heartening thing i've seen in my lifetime, but right now it feels very, very fragile to me... there needs to be something really big happen to stimulate things to go beyond where they are at the moment... i'm certainly not talking about violence or anything cataclysmic but something big nonetheless...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 2 comments

Occupy: Numerous. Really fucking numerous.

from diane gee at firedoglake...

There are many elements of change.

This is a tough one for the Oligarchs. Really. I can’t imagine their contingency plans, and all their think tanks could have come up with this. They expected the riots of 66 and 68, or perhaps they envisioned a charismatic leader who they could discredit. Or assassinate.

Leaderless. Peaceful. Powerful. Old. Young. Right wing. Left wing. Centrists. Black. Latino. White. Asian. Straight. Gay. Military. Anti-war. Blue collar. White collar.

Most of all? Numerous. Really fucking numerous.

And this, my dears, it the tip of the iceberg.

good stuff, diane... thanks...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Participative, transparent, open democracy in action at Occupy Wall Street

i posted this on thursday...

i believe that the next steps for the occupy movement is to show that the brand of participative democracy that is flowering among the protestors is not only sustainable but also the right way to go for the country...

encouragingly, somebody else sees it from the same perspective...

"The process is the demand" is something of a mantra here at Occupy Wall Street. A direct democracy where a General Assembly, composed of whoever wishes to participate, hears proposals from autonomous, leaderless working groups and approves them, when it manages to, by consensus. "Process," for Occupy Wall Street, usually means full equality for all people, with no one officially designated a chairperson, a spokesperson, a leader.

[...]

If the process is the demand, then esteem for a robust welfare state providing equal access to free social services is easy to extrapolate, park to nation.

more like this...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I'm not so sure strong demands are what's necessary for Occupy Wall Street

shamus cooke in a post entitled, Next Steps for the Occupy Movement, says this...

City governments are slow-playing the Occupy Movement where it is especially strong — New York and Portland, Oregon, etc. — and are attacking quickly in cities where momentum hasn't caught fire —, Denver, Boston, etc. The massive demonstrations in New York and Portland have protected the occupied spaces thus far, as the mayor, police,and media attempt to chip away at public opinion by exploiting disunity in the movement or focusing on individuals promoting violence, drug use, etc.

To combat this dynamic, the Occupy Movement people needs to unite around common messages that they can effectively broadcast to those 99% not yet on the streets; or to maintain the sympathy of those who've already attended large marches and demonstrations. And although sections of the Occupy Movement scoff at demands, they are crucially necessary. Demands unite people in action, and distinguish them from their opponents; demands give an aim and purpose to a movement and act as a communications and recruiting tool to the wider public. There is nothing to win if no demands are articulated.

One reason that the wealthy are strong is because they are united around demands that raise profits for the corporations they own: slashing wages and benefits, destroying unions, lowering corporate tax rates, destroying social programs, privatization, ending Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, etc.

To consolidate the ranks of the Occupy Movement we need similar demands that can inspire the 99%. These are the type of demands that will spur people into action — demands that will get working class people off their couches and into the streets! The immediate task of the movement is to broadcast demands that will agitate the majority of the 99% into action.

i disagree with cooke's suggested direction...

there's an assumption implicit in making demands that says you believe there is someone out there who has more power than you do who can respond to those demands... i think both the beauty and the strength of the occupy movement so far has been its independence and self-sufficiency as well as its belief that they already have the power... i've marveled at observations coming out of the encampments describing a wonderfully transparent participative democracy supported by people helping each other in all the important ways...

i believe that the next steps for the occupy movement is to show that the brand of participative democracy that is flowering among the protestors is not only sustainable but also the right way to go for the country... "demands" that somebody outside of the protestors themselves should do something to fix things doesn't feel right for the spirit of this movement... i think the protestors are fixing things among themselves just fine...

i don't fault cooke for his views... given his background as an organizer, he comes by them naturally but i think the approach he describes is of another era...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Glenn cites a commenter on Congress: "...avoid unpredictable democratic floor action, and the accountability of public debate"

once again, glenn hits the nail on the head...

in his latest post, he takes on the smarmy and generally odious david brooks who should be taken on always and everywhere out of general principle...

But more generally, what Brooks so envies about British political culture -- a small, incestuous, aristocratic, homogenized group of trans-partisan elites harmoniously resolving their differences -- is exactly what already drives American policy and politics. And that is what establishment spokespeople like Brooks always mean when they yearn for "bipartisanship": wise old men getting together in secret and reaching agreements that exclude democratic debate and render irrelevant genuine differences among the citizenry.

participative democracy in the u.s. has long been more a matter of myth and legend than reality, and it is only in recent years, given the multiple opportunities to compare different versions of the "truth" provided by the internet, that we have been able to grasp just how disenfranchised we are as citizens of the - supposedly - "freest" country in the world...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments